need some time to reshuffle staff or get ready for this so we proposed a six-month buffer. starting accidents requiring the direct supervision of climate. another tradition is a requirement to use some sort of barrier for any treatment in the past. remember, were not allowing people who pass except if it's a public health and provoke safety issue. and usually its poison oak. you cannot have workers without objection is a worker health issue and so in this kind of the case will have some sort of barrier as an example, to make it abundantly clear that this is been treated along with the usual postings before and after.

we had a lot of discussion about further clarifying areas frequented by children and i think part of this we realize something in the language that was contradictory that is we were on the one hand saying can use it playgrounds are areas recruited by children and the other hand were saying you can use it for invasive species. so, we put an extra clause just to make this abundantly clear that, no, we cannot treat playgrounds. so we put the prohibited in the section to clarify that. so, those are the additional requirements we have much more to do. i'm going to talk just a little bit about some other cities experiences since this is something that some of these submitters have provided you some information about other areas that are banning they sorts of bands on herbicides or pesticides in

general. we checked in with a lot of these but particularly the ones that were more comparable in size to san francisco and the diversity of their landscapes. boulder was one of them and it was in the media they had been wound up and this is back in 2012. as a matter fact boulder was part of a series of meetings this summer about this whole topic to try to find a way to this topic susan the media elite band a product they did not ban the active ingredient that's in round appeared to have a system that's similar to ours with a limited particular uses. top blanket bans but it's illuminating uses which allows us to be much more informed and gives us a chance to do some problem solving on what are the early the problems and we do

without treatment or are there alternative treatments and are they safer. these are the same thing that boulder asked in their programs. an extensive natural areas. uses similar array of products as a last resort as we do and these are always ashes 1 million times every day but is a last resort and we prefer to do manual heating or other techniques before doing chemicals. as it boulder. san jose give a lot in your packet about demonstration garden in san jose and these folks in san jose were part of our process this summer. the series of 3 meetings with 14 public agencies about the subject that we convenes. those are very productive discussions. this particular report that's in your packet has a lot of great techniques, alternatives to herbicides and

i look through this closely good i'm happy to say that we do just about all of them or have done what doing it is just about all those approaches weathered sheet mulching were replanting or regular mulching and so forth. it also unfortunately-well unfortunately for the title of this actually was not herbicide. they did use herbicides in this project for been muted grass. i confirmed all this with their coordinator. the bands in encinitas were specially interested and interesting because they have a series of overlapping general bands on the kinds of herbicides. i spoke with them i was told that there were kind of the series of unintended consequences from this. one of which is to have

an organic part proposal as part of their plan and they realize that because of the way the bands were done they cannot use any of the organically survived product is that too high of acute toxicity that is skin and eye. the thing i discovered there still using pre-emergent herbicides in encinitas which is now because they fell through the cracks in those bands. we band those are probably in debbie's, since i've been here we've never had -except for one at the airport. on the airfields could never use that are more hostages did so that's an example what happens you try to do it the general ban set up specifically mandating uses. finally there's richmond'. were watching very closely what happens over there. they have kind of a blanket ban in place on

herbicide use it unfortunately they didn't provide any additional resources for manual move will and it's pretty clear that you need to do that if you take away run-up in particular those kinds of products i spoke to current and past corner of the program this in a lot of challenges and landscape management were waiting for report from them on how things are going very much looking forward to our meetings to report on. i think the interesting to compare notes. meanwhile, we have successfully used our to reduce overall parks and recreation combined to one pesticide use all pesticides not just herbicides and in the long-term you seen this before but we've had 76%

reduction which is generally much more toxic humans. along the line you have to narrow that we have effectively removed eliminative use of a long long list of really bad stuff. most recently-fungicide use puts on the golf course in large quantities up until 2 years ago . these are big times but the kind of there not-we don't know what these things are and would rather not send some cases. we've had a long history of success in taking these products away. without having an impact on her ability to manage that. a lot of comments about worker health and the need to and run it was

determined the apollo personage in a year ago we take this very seriously. you're very different opinion of roundup now than we did a year ago and that is why we embarked on this whole series of meetings and discussions on ways we can check this out. the people most of those in any herbicide pesticide use are always the workers and so there are multiple agencies regulate protective equipment. this was questions down in the house section of that circle. this gets for a detail. we have the dept. of pesticide regulation and the epa, us epa bittorrent labeling language o'connor personal protective equipment is required. we also have our own environmental health and safety officers were trained industrial hygienists should we rely on them to decide what

they need to wear and to do the fitting of the respirators and what not but we can do as a primitive environment is first of all to direct supervision requirements as a mention is going to have an impact on worker compliance and ppe. but also this is going to be part of spring training this year, next month as a matter fact which is something we do every year where we will--we be talking about the new status of roundup as a relates to their personal protective equipment. so, i think maybe some of the departments will have some more to say about this. finally, transparency was another big topic that came up in the public comment and in the question bbq in with. were really proud of conspiracy. in general. we have the posting requirements for every

application. the database of every pesticide application has been made on city properties with a lot of detailed information that very few other cities have. we have this back from 1996. it is a huge challenge to keep that do quality control on these things when your people from all over the state submitting data and one of the things we can definitely do better were going to be working on is to make to do that work quickly and to get the data out there more quickly and more readily accessible way. so, that is something we have on our list absolutely and i should say there's some interesting public suggestions on this like having a way to tax people who want to know about application to the so something worth looking into. i guess another element of transparency is just having public meetings like this like

these. here's the timeline from last april. we had 9 meetings on the subject. since last about 6 of them public meetings. a lot of time and effort put into the use and i think it's worth it in the end if we get a good product to make some restrictions that make some reductions in harm or risk for our workers and public. what i would highly recommend doing tonight is that you approve this set of restrictions, which is a package with the less. the 2016 reduce pesticide list of intersections are part of that. as one package and we can work on some of these things until the process starts over again next november. we can have more discussions. so, i'm going to stop now and turn it over to my

colleague from san francisco airport. given unit is the court, nader out there i want to thank all these folks for coming and joining us today. >> testifier: my name is tina newman >> testifier: my name is tina newman court, nader for san francisco airport. we got some pictures here. i'm here to talk about the ban on the herbicides especially-it would have significant revocations on the airport. his has written records for the tall whites can interfere with the tower pilots signs releaser taxiways. we can use people in your field and pouring weed eating or mulching or using open flames around moving planes out there. they would not last very long. it's a hazard to everybody.

this maintains safety and health and security on the airfields surrounding buildings. the landside maintenance motorcycle people side, lakers is the firehouse. we don't use roundup in our landscapes and a longer and it taken out a lot of our bonds and a lot of our plants that use a lot of water and would cause a lot of weed problems also using a lot of water. and we substitute a lot of cactuses and c france and in need of friends who also start collecting water. this arraigned arrow and using that for the cactuses because honestly we don't need a lot. so we been able to reduce roundup a lock. the governor is also there's some more of our plants. here's some sheet molding to do a lot of sheep mulching. the dude of regular mulching. and they can pull weeds in the use burners. this all very labor-intensive. the

public does not roam to our landscaping serviceare to them. we do have to do a renovation project the workers are all licensed and educated on chemical use and have the proper ppe in order. we need to be of use to one herbicides to ensure the safety of our workers especially guardrail work and medians were workers in public can be potentially seriously hurt by automobile supplying to pre-patient mechanical methods were handling. it's a safety and health issue keep roads has sent personally to strike the weeds a way to keep the past way. the report is a vast expanse of land and human herbicide is the only way we can do this in a timely manner and safety for workers and public and air traffic. thank you. >> testifier: next up with kilometers from the public utilities commission.

>> testifier: good evening. thanks for your patience. it's been a long night for you i'm sure. but it was too limited division matters for natural resources and lands management. i want to first say thank you for the opportunity. so to recognize the capable staff. is been a very thorough and robust process to bring us to this point in time we are to support the staff recommendation also a figure staff of the pc was for proof here tonight but spices them one people speaking for a lot of people. only give a glimpse of how we do our work under the ipm process overregulated. she was sense of what this means for us. the first slide which is give you a bit of a map and the map shows the areas that are owned in fee and san francisco in the area. in rough numbers the city spoke 47 mi.2 in properties in the city my group has organism that

to peninsula watershed which was referenced earlier in the alameda watershed. the alameda watershed is about 58 mi.2. just bigger than san francisco and self. it's a large spaces. the blue lines are the right one in the pipelines in between and i didn't one make it more complicated each other right away of the high sierra and the national park and national force. suffice to say all the work we do throughout the system is under the ipm ordinance and consistent with the program here and chris does an amazing job bringing the city together in each year to do more on this case to use less. so, we have environmental stewardship policy of separate is a pure heart policies the city the qc for the water and price which made the list. so it sort of begs the question why we want to move vegetation

river stewardship program. we do for a couple reasons. these are really the public safety utility reasons we do work throughout the system. we have the right-of-way vegetation management guideline to protect the pipelines in the transitive industries and the roots are not great for pipeline's widow tried to keep trees author rightly. we try to do the best we can do great in of landscapes on the right-of-way local communities and provide access to regular by the state on the safety dance and only trees either on dams. because of the roots and also for inspection the one be able to get to the dams get r games are very old and earth dams which means they're always potential for being too grown them. were also regular by the state to prevent a risk minimize the risk and prevent fires as best we can. sure you've heard about the fire up in the high sierra 2.5 years ago now. the fires every year on the local watersheds and the pencil the

alameda watershed in the way we do with that of talk on a 2nd but spices a remove vegetation on the education of our properties from ruled out risk generally the roads and also the trails. we do our best to protect those assets on the trails in particular on the pencil in particular we have a pretty large project that's about to go into to move a lot of dead trees along the trail especially the san mateo county betrayal, should the drought and what that means for the trees and also the bureaus that have come to invest the tree. as our bodies and we do work like this in regular by other folks to make sure he gets on the certainly. this of environmental restrictions. i think it was referenced earlier in the biosphere on the planet and we live in one of them is the golden gate biosphere. in our watershed result is recognized as a biosphere could

we have a lot of mitigation projects on the watershed. we own about 60,000 acres of land in the bay area. by 2000 acres about is been heavily manipulated right now to mitigate under state and federal law the impacts associate with our capital program for $.6 billion capital program to repair and protect water quality for seismic robustness throughout the system along the fault lines some cases are so springs dam in particular other requires to mitigate and redoing that on a watershed to make those regulations to do that we need to create date of landscapes were doing a mostly on the peninsula for native grasslands it's you that with the tickets in the vegetation to make space for those things. how do we do

it? we have a combination of tools we use google to start with screen results. we graze the watershed on a all means that we do along the right-of-way of the property boundary lubricant in some areas we can't do those things because of sensitive plants and some case we have to get in our get a hand stories of people that volunteer. youth programs the user hands manual tools and mechanical tools to avoid the spaces and provide a buffer but also to avoid the impasse of the native landscape. in the end, there's some things that are just really hard beast of this pipe that effort. this one example, think for bringing to my attention putting the presentation together. wishing spring to me was easy to that ones that are not great connotation did stink and worked in a together. so it's exponentially increased as a state worth. it's a nasty thing. the cows don't want to eat it. because the rational staff when they try to touch it

if you try to cut it would distort it comes backward dense. it's not good. it invades our watersheds and so were unsure how organic you with this yet but we have a plan to pilot things happen to start with the herbicide application. we do ask them it's all the time. this part of the in a process that chris eventually get together and talk about how we can do with things before we have to take the last step and maybe apply a small modern herbicide. trying to solve arises some of these places easily put him in black tarps and bake them could we provide roots to brian roots as this weekend. pencil terms but in the end in some cases there are a lot of other options. so i guess the point sauce all the other choices in a couple cases of an example we use techniques objects while about some herbicides in the vegetation is really the method of last resort. i think that's it for my overview can obviously to answer questions

afterwards that is lisa comes up i want to make a comment about lisa and the natural areas program. reese's work is funded in part by us in san francisco and sometimes i feel like our staff is lucky to have these will be amazingly escapes outside of san francisco to take care. the gigantic and leases job i think in some ways the lot harder and maybe even more important. because cars place about our landscape is the book hard time getting to it. they can sit here in san francisco. not talking about a big space or talk about a lot of small little spaces but i think the board because they do provide an opportunity for people to experience the role the weights than described here today and lisa and i both have young kids but the same age of talk but that quite a bit and i want to reach out and support their efforts for what they're doing and hopefully the commission will support them as well. thank you. >> president omotalade thank you.

>> >> testifier: lisa wayne has artie been introduced. parks and recreation >> testifier: good evening commissioners. lisa wayne manager with you parks and recreation and i am here today to talk about our whole department and i will try to do it very quickly. our department land stewards for 3400 acres and over 220 as part of this obesity why do we provide a variety of land stewardship uses and opportunities for citizens and visitors of san francisco,, the examples are shown here on the slide from active recreation uses and recreation programs to passive recreation spaces like the worst part and thousands of people every weekend to our

marquee and cultural site such as the conservatory of flowers and japanese sea garden and many others. and natural areas. the remnants of our indigenous ecosystem the place that holds the biodiversity has been so eloquently described in the previous speakers. so, in order to protect all those places and to provide for the intended uses in all of our glands need to manage them and i think that is the theme i want to bring across to you all today. whether you are talking about a golf course, a ballfield, a marquee site in natural area we need to manage them. they do not manage themselves. we have

a variety of stewardship tactics and i'm glad tim from the qc went through some more of these in detail. i'll highlight a couple of them right here for you. mechanical controls. a few months ago we used many excavators removing invasive plant from wetlands in golden gate park could we also used manual removal where ever we can for many many species in natural areas, invasive species as well as we do not landscape areas last year we had 110,000 volunteer hours. almost entirely devoted to weed management and weed control. so we are leveraging volunteer resources wherever we can to try to implement these ipm strategies. ipm also involves

the holistic and ecosystem approach. i want to hone in here a prevention because really it starts in many ways with prevention than if you don't have a problem you don't have to take action to address it. so, prevention comes in a variety of forms. a few of them are listed here promoting healthy soil is something that we do not landscape so make sure that there's nitrogen pictures. there's good organisms in the soil that are providing micronutrients needed to support the plant life and fend off pests and pathogens. agreements are many many many of these. this is reducing the spread of weeds by just taking care of your equipment minimizing corrosion and soil disturbance generally so that you don't have places for invasive weeds weeds in general to take root and promoting

biological diversity by building resilience. dr.-i mention that as well. by building resilience in the systems we are better able to address issues like climate change we hope over time and by promoting biodiversity we are creating habitat for beneficial again that prevent pest and pathogen outbreaks from happening. so the lower right-hand corner is hopefully something that people are familiar with. it's the sheet mulching project we ended up printing with diversity of native plants. not only to achieve environmental stewardship mandate if you will intermission to promote and provide habitat plans for local wildlife but again also to provide that resilience in our landscapes and beneficial

and promote beneficial insects. that's a beginning of a project there. the upper slide speaks to the last piece of that old to cover his innovation and experimentation so were actively right now looking at using citrus oil product called avenger to reduce our tier 1 usage. it's a burned down product that works preventing with right now you see to test proctor vs. the control pod which is bright green. were hopeful about this kind of experimentation as tim alluded to is going on constantly in the ipm fields and we are very good at it that by our amazing ipm supervisor kevin will and who i know you've heard from previously and was because of

him and the innovations that we are doing at the department that received the ipm innovator award in 2014 from the dept. of pesticide regulation. it's a statewide organization that's really devoted to and looking at necessary reductions. so we received one of the highest awards in ipm innovator awards. last slide. so, in order to deliver these lands to all of you to visitors of san francisco for their intended uses, whether those are the intended uses to protect biodiversity, whether it's to provide recreational amenity like a golf course, or whether it's to preserve the cultural landscape with these places all need to be managed and herbicides and pesticides are one of the tools that we use.

as you've seen from your own permanent staff there've been significant reductions over time not only see white but in our department as well these very small amounts of ingredients so this is department wise good we used less-we typically use less than 2 ounces per acre of active ingredient to take away all the water and the vegetable oil and all the inert if you'll parts of the volume of material that put out there and you get the active ingredient that equates to less than 2 ounces per acre of active ingredient department wide. so dinner very small amounts and i think the speaker from mid-peninsula open spaces set all buses when managers are looking at this as a tool in the toolbox were using it very judiciously. i think that was the word he used that i could not agree more. i think these

numbers speak to that fact. most of the removal we do this by hand. there are some plants and species that we supposedly removed by him. many of them. we are having good success with those. herbicides are used again as a last resort as has been mentioned and i think that's also reflected in the overall lower numbers you're seeing.. i want to conclude by saying and thinking dept. of the environment, the staff honestly dr. chris geiger for your continuing leadership on this issue. this dimension am also a parent who lives in the city so i have a personal interest in this as well. our department will continue to work with your staff through all these difficult questions to draw to come up with solutions that make sense for all our landscapes so we are

there with you as a partner and will continue to be be so and i want to just concluded saying we support the adoption of the reduce risk pesticide list. >> president omotalade thank you. >> testifier: last but not least we have the department of public works. >> testifier: good evening. my name is-i am the ipm supervisor for public works and i'm also a booth on the ground worker. i'm an applicator. so my perspective of this is more about safety. the things that we do every day to ensure that we are safe for the public is also being thought of in that

process. most of the areas that we do applications on our high traffic areas that are median strips and also in tunnels for example broadway title would be a place we make applications also. some of the practices that we currently carry out that are not currently required but will be required on that no employee is allowed to make applications without much supervision of a tracy already and that is something that i implemented while in this position because i felt it was very important tab that educational experience while the work is actually taking place. some of the safety personal protective equipment that's required by our 2 permits is we have to wear a permeable gloves, boots, safety glasses and tyvek suits. but

since i've been there i've taken a step further and adding more details to those personal protective equipment as in we have to wear tyvek suits than a ballistic on the ankles and on the wrists and we also wear 2 pair of gloves. one pair of gloves we keep on like say the latex type of love and we put a dish and love on top of that on making applications. wearing an respirator was something not required but that is something that i have implemented also and if we do not wear respirators we also have the option of wearing face shields were making applications. some of the educational commons that i required in addition to the education that is required by the state is that everyone has to have 40 hours of additional

field training in addition to the hours of carpet the state which are only for and also we all employees are required to you the you cic online gardner exam preparation course that also helps with educating all employees and those courses include pesticide law regulations, pest problem diagnosis ipm management, pesticides and the hazards, protecting people and the environment and handling emergencies and selecting use of application equipment. all those things are covered before someone can even make an application. for public safety, one of the things that we've implemented as a applications are done on meeting strips is that all of our applications are done between the hours of 2

and 6 am so that's pretty much when there's less pedestrian traffic and there's also less car traffic. so not only are we keeping the public safety were also keep yourself safe at the same time. some of our users will of course we use herbicides to do vegetation management but at the same time we also do it to produce art injury rates mortgage rates have gone down significantly and send back injuries and repetitive motion injuries since we have implemented ipm program of public works. we have also reduced our accident and medians as in for example that would be breaking car windows. we break a lot of car windows using weed backers in median strips were cars are out there on the road. so that's most deftly been reduced since

implementing this. so for future reduction will be doing is working closely with the landscape architect to design [inaudible] and currently reevaluating our landscapes to implement better practices as an adding ground coverage and things like that to mitigate some of our pest problems out there. thank you. >> president omotalade thank you. >> testifier: so, just i guess in summary, i want to talk a little bit about the ideas we plan to explore in the upcoming months and to the list process starts over again. some of these came from these

conversations. one is we are moving forward with for the carbon base on the landscape design into city landscapes that i mentioned before we had worked closely with parks and recreation on this to get netscape's certified in these week of first in the city. in the bay i should. as i mentioned were going to be working on the details with citywide contractor policy seizure so we have had this really dialed in and can have greater confidence when there are any situations where contractors using herbicides.. another idea the possibly training project managers various departments on some these requirements, some of the situations that they can come across as a mentioned the text message unification idea. further illumination set of restrictions is a beginning. we plan on looking for further restrictions for further uses we can wind safer approaches as

we move forward and that's the idea to whittle away the uses that are approved for these products. the quick turnaround quality assurance for the test site data. when you need continuing conversation about ppe with the department and also improving signage. the small improvement in the written instructions before you with we think we can do better on that as well. so, i forgot to mention that it is this sort of wish on collaboration we have here gets me up in the morning and this is what's exciting about this program. every month were sitting there selling homes in the group and they are so committed to the why of the program that aegis is really a wonderful thing to work with. i think all the department who cannot tonight this long evening and i just

want to finish off by saying we highly recommend you prove what is true for you the 2016 w. including these restrictions onto one herbicide use. that's it for me tonight. >> president omotalade thank you. thank you very much for the presentation. we truly appreciate it. the depth of the perspective that you brought into as well as all the individuals in the community have come out tonight to speak. i think both from the effort of all the city agencies and also the public participation have definitely fueled robust discussion very important issues and san francisco. i want to make sure i can do this but i would like to go straight to the public and then commissioners discussion. i would ask in public comment if you did speak to this issue in item 7 much that you do not

restate your point. we've heard you. i personally research every article you sent me or video i have definitely read is in my brain. i thank you for that. i was on parts of meeting them. with that i deftly will open public comment.the first person of good [calling names] still doing 3 min. we're still doing 3 min. of public comment. >> testifier: i like to speak to 2 things: 2 questions. shouldn't i be allowed the revocation of invasive species

buyer beside based on the 2016 pesticide list and also item 14 on the restriction? i like to say a look closely at the pesticide list nic underuse limitations the language reads as follows. use only for targeted treatment of high-profile or highly invasive species. the california invasive plant counsel categories for invasive species are used as benchmarks only use the categories of high, moderate or limited. they list -as moderate and i live eucalyptus as limited invasive. neither a highly invasive plants. so the use of garlands for culture should be prohibited according to your own definitions. i don't know what high-profile means in your

language. it's not defined anywhere. does it mean lots of yellow flowers were tall trees? early language could've very specific meanings and be consistent with the categories that-news. suddenly the meeting of item 14 on the list of restrictions suggested restrictions for tier 1 lacks specific meanings tied to standard stated definitions. the thing was is actually subject to interpretation by those who advocate the use of herbicides. i like to add if we cannot get a more tory and tonight on these tier 1 in tier 2 herbicides that i am asking for six-month interval for the commission to come back and for yet p.m. for him to have developed a phaseout plan for tier 1 and tier 2 in the next 6 months. i think that's a real gold that was possible. 2nd

question. is it necessary according to the preparation of principle to spray in the natural areas? the answer is, no. there's no great danger to human health from these non-native plants or other economic or static more environmental necessities such sprain. we've heard that documented for you many different alternatives. i still love research around the country and around the world have presented that information to you. our ipm programs as budgeting and staffing limitations are not in themselves adequate justification for oversight use. i think ipm should develop the real costs both staff materials and the consequences for human health outcomes when you look at cost.thank you very much. >> president omotalade thank you.

>> testifier: a lot of people have hit upon this but there's a couple-i have not heard any talk really about the golf course if i understood correctly from past presentations, i think they are one that gets usersthe ground up specifically. so was happy to see you being banned for being used for cosmetic reasons because i can thing anyone want to use it on a golf course which is far from a natural area. since the state of california followed the world health organization pacification as a probable carcinogen and demandedthey label it as such people are up and down the state are wondering if the cancer is

caused by rhonda. now if you google health affects around at some of the first websites that pop up our attorneys asking do you have cancer because your cancer because by exposure to round up? a woman with lymphoma in southern california she and her husband are sod growers the first in the state to sue over her cancer. she just sued monsanto but it's only a matter of time before lawsuits are filed against city governments in cancer patients discover they use continued after the state has declared it a probable carcinogen. i ran into a man in my neighborhood walking my new dog and we were discussing this because you wonder what happened to my dog and i told him that i suspected around that contributed to his horrible world cancer and he said, i have lymphoma and i'm wondering if that was caused by

decades of playing on san francisco san francisco golf course it. just a week ago the san francisco examiner published a column about secrets and secretive parks and recreation is used about randa. to file papers in the sunshine act when and where spain occurred and you can't get that until after the sprain. i mentioned that to several people and to a person they said it looks like that's something to hide. i moved to san francisco straight out of college drawn by its beauty and progressive politics is a sure many of you did. today 36 years later the homeowner a community dr. salk is this person in the city that i still love. i know that you love san francisco and i know that you want to do right by san francisco people. so, please ban the tier 1 herbicides at this another way

>> president omotalade thank you. next speaker, please. [calling names] >> testifier: eric brooks. our city of san francisco. this issue before you is very simple. that is, that the only time when a chemical should be used in areas where people children and pets are frequenting is to protect public health and safety. to protect people from getting injured and from dying. that is the only time when it is okay to list exposing someone to a chemical that could ensure our children. that could give them cancer that can give them auto

immune disorder. it could create allergy problems that could give them will foam up, you name it. so, all you have to do is look at the uses that they're proposing with these tier 1 and tier 2 chemicals especially the tier 1 chemicals and say, is it necessary to use those chemicals they are to protect public health and safety? that is not necessarily a natural areas. it's not necessary for aesthetics. it's not necessary even to protect an endangered species. it isn't necessary to risk someone's life were child's life to do that. we've got to remember, san francisco area the urban area is a set of watersheds. so even before saying we've got certain boundary around schools are places where children are

playing i'm sorry, that's not good enough because you could have hundreds of feet away a hillside where a cure one pesticide is getting used and when and water are going to carry that all the way around the entire city. children will be exposed. people will be exposed or you can go to the arctic and you can go to mountain tops of this planet and fine chemicals we've used in urban areas in animals on those mountaintops and in those arctic areas. in the antarctic. chemicals do not state where you spray them. that means that the only reason that you should approve the use of tier 1 especially and i was a tier 1 and tier 2 chemicals to kill plants is when you have to do that to keep people from being harmed or injured. that's a very rare occurrence. so i'd ask you even if it takes to link this decision to change this policy so that those cases

where it's not necessary to protect human health and safety you cannot use these chemicals. when we pass this in the mid-90s we did not >> president omotalade thank you. next speaker, please. ca [calling names terrasa i hope you guys heard rev.-it's a grassroots >> testifier: i hope you purred and environmental action. basically with roots in >>[adjournment] san francisco and they took initiative together the map for parks and recreation which i helped [inaudible]. i hope you've seen it because a lot of records can be hard for me to show to you right now. it's been recently just extended in the ring county and hopefully will be adding other toxic chemicals as well. so, please

do take a look if you haven't looked already this love public interest in that. we want we feel san francisco should be leading this not being dragged .. at any rate, my other thing i want to clarify talk about how the pesticides use age. weaver numbers of one or 2 ounces per acre for numbers. thank you have numbers for just last year. tier 1 into 2 pesticides bayview hill got about 3 ounces per acre twin peaks 3.85 ounces per acre from a billy goat hill 4.29 ounces per acre and 1.73 but you have to consider this is taking the usage of the pesticide divided by the verge of that natural area and for instance you know

mount davidson it's installed wooded and although pesticide application in a non-wooded area. so concentrations are actually much higher than that 1.73. the other thing i like to point out the job is to protect the public and i did send in some comments on the restrictions on the use of pesticides. would like to point out just a couple of things in particular. this business about trails no use of 15 feet of designated actively maintained trail public patents. who knows, no one knows where it doesn't baited trail is the one in the public knows. what is an actively maintained path? nobody knows. so this language basically says-i guess i want to say there's a trail as people use it so this is saying too bad for you if you said trail because it is not designated a newbie exposed

good blackberries were no mushroom [inaudible] and we were eating blackberries so this should not be based on season. is the presence of fruits and finally this week sprouting trees or modifier has it and this language about landscape innovations nobody has >> president omotalade thank you. next speaker, please. [calling names] >> testifier: i just want to say i appreciate the ipm to coordinated to expand the program tonight. i heard several clear and well considered reasons to adopt the reduced risk list including the new provisions with in it. among those reasons is the control of invasive species. artist augmented to public safety and the environment and protecting workers could apply

the apartment of the environment and the commission for taking the reduced risk list seriously light of new information about-. i personally trust our ip" medicine dept. of the environment and encourage the commission to adopt the new disk risk list. these are not tie the hands of our lan manager . land does not manage it so. our limiters have detailed knowledge as well as commitment to those lands interpublic. as of expertise that we need to trust. i think the dept. of the environment has shown it has an excellent relationship becomes an hope you move [inaudible] >> president omotalade thank you. next speaker, please. [calling names] >> testifier: i'm a resident of san francisco and i go organic vegetables and when the community garden. i'm here to ask you to allow train people to work on the city's natural areas protected averse

california's major species plays a very limited amount of pesticides that no other effective approach. as you've heard california's recognize biodiversity more unique species than any of the region in north america. haas san francisco [inaudible]. as well as climate change in the moment this is city is threatened by other species from the world. is a major concern of many organizations. dealing with these invasive species is important to minimize the impact on people and wildlife. lots of invasive plants can be effectively controlled but there are a few species that cannot be controlled. one of those is the [inaudible]. the proposed restrictions are for

reason i would prevent use within 15 feet of any past. there's more than 30 miles of trails that run through san francisco's actual areas and that means something like 10% of 1100 acres protected under the-would be given of 2 basic plans. they be off-limits. there is a strong risk of it rapidly spreading to the neighboring areas. in those areas cannot be controlled. many of those areas become monoculture of plants. while were considering this pesticide-is important realize any san francisco residence [inaudible] they can use it on the sidewalk with complete compliance with epa state regulations. epa directions on the packaging approve a packet

is why quays gravel areas or mulch paths. maybe some of this will change but would talk about much more restrictive regulations. it's important [inaudible] to prevent invasive species from smothering the native ecology. [inaudible] to remove general prohibition of the 5 and allow you in 15 feet of designated actively maintained parks within our natural areas. >> president omotalade thank you. next speaker, please. [calling names] >> testifier: my name is linda schaffer. i've among other things the honor of representing district 10 a citywide committee concerned with parks recreation open space for the last 8 years. during those 8 years i've learned a lot. i've also

learned a lot just sitting here all this time. for the previous speakers. i have a number i had a number of things i want to say i find what i want to say is basically what he said. the previous speaker. the purchase, articulated the things that i had in my head to convey. so, i think i would just like to remind everyone that the goal that is being pursued with the assistance of the ipm program and the work of all these dedicated people is to try to preserve what little is left of our cities national heritage. that's were trying to do. it's as has been said before, it is necessary in pursuing that goal

to remember we have 2 manage the parts of natural heritage that are left. not going to take care of themselves. it's not possible. i know that we all look forward to a day when it's no longer will be necessary to use chemical means to help achieve that goal, but i think that i stand with the people who would say we are not there. this is not that day.. i am impressed by the fact that the integrated pest management program that san francisco has has been used as a model by other locations and they have come up with their own programs based on the work that's been done here. i have also impressed by the fact that the words that have been one by in

particular not only the ipm but the natural areas program and our city which am a very very strong supporter so, i urge all of you to approve the resolution in front of you and to approve the pesticide piece. i forgot what it's called. the ipm list of materials that can be used. >> president omotalade thank you. next speaker, please. [calling names] >> testifier: i also support your approving the proposal in front of you. i also support actual areas program. i believe educated, well trained and very

concerned about the judicious use of pesticides. worker resides. this is a persistent weed. i've been after for 5 years. i tried watching it but it keeps coming back. so, can you imagine all of the people had to pull them it would be a herculean task. i think they using here beside is really quite appropriate in this case. >> president omotalade thank you. next speaker, please. [calling names] >> testifier: we are located

in berkeley and real estate white board of directors and we work with sister organizations and states across the country. we work here in california with land managers across the state to effectively protect the environment from invasive eyes. worker lamp falls to protect sierra meadows, san francisco so marshes center value wash ways. as a largely urban and running. a strong program to protect them. all the major cities in us value the remaining wild areas and san francisco should be proud of stewarding this unique biological heritage. land managers to use and ipm approach could many tools including a resize part of the toolbox. imagine working to protect biodiversity to be aware of any potential impact human health or to wildlife. we just several months ago released a practice manual when using herbicides to manage

invasive plants. up a copy you like to meet with the commission . utility and might have. my goal in commenting today is summer to let you know the work of the natural areas program is part of a larger efforts and that herbicides are accepted to in the up your toolbox for managing invasive plants. i like to give a quick uptake to provide context for the national level in 2014 the white house counsel, preparedness and resilience [inaudible] mirc is natural resources met identified threats to ecosystem resilience and called on the us dept. of interior to develop a framework for invasive species response. the dept. of interior [inaudible] basher framework for rapid response. you have a program right here san francisco

doing exactly that. that's only need to protect biodiversity and also prepare for climate adaptation. lastly, i would like to just credit the professional ipm scientists we just heard from you i think you can rest assured we have well considered science-based opinion to base our work on. >> president omotalade thank you. next speaker, please. [calling names] >> testifier: >> president omotalade is just cannot hear? is just could not hear?

>> testifier: is kevin at the

court therefore bonilla to comment as a parent. myself sometimes it's easy to forget because of the job i do with bmi pesticide applicant but also parents. i $3 and 2 granddaughters. what i love them dearly was a single debt for years raising these girls. so, as such, have to protect their interests and as a pest control applicator and some of the concerns these folks have i have [inaudible] because of working with this material. i want to cut through and talk about what it is that we do to establish, what my risk is. i thought to myself i am a

parent. they have an application had to fill out. questions.. do i drink a lot or smoke or other baby risk-taking behavior like bungee jumping. he also asked type whatever job i did. as part of that they take this into consideration when there's a calculus they come up with a rate you much you pay for life insurance. i'm happy to say in my case i live a very healthy lifestyle and they take into consideration i think the job not only the job you do but staff of people that research this menu of course professional applicators are trained safety. we have to get a license. all this is part of the job./we got a preferred rate of my life insurance. i'm happy to say save some money on that. that's one point. also

wanted to mention that the reason why got involved with this for them-i owned a pest management committee for years. i sold to a national company that i had to decide windows can do next. actually, because they cover does the job for pest management in the city and i need to know something about the ordinance and this is something i could really this thing sink my teeth into it i really wanted to be a part of. so, in closing those way to assess risk. there's a worker comp rate based on work classification. you see her on this graphical leave a copy for use workers comp rates are higher for many other professions like for our store installers. the last part a lot to talk about is the usgs. a

survey that 1984 through in pounds >> president omotalade thank you. next speaker, please. [calling names] >> testifier: i'm speaking for the san francisco forest alliance. we are concerned that the 32% of san francisco heartland manage as a natural area. the natural areas program's objectives to restrict access to popular walking trails cutting down beautiful and healthy trees and applying dangerous cocos onto the land. the natural areas program targets nearly 40 species of invasive plants which your one insured to herbicides. like what you've heard the pesticides used against this is [inaudible] and

the worst herbicide allowed on city property. ipm has said for years that were fine alternatives could stop targeting its pervasive. it's everywhere you seen it and you're trying to target in the natural areas. we urgently request your process be not be used in the natural areas. results must be applied constantly. you seen that if you seen those videos you seen the costly sprain and its constant. they're always up there. they're there month after month trying to rid the area of the weeds repeated applications is not sustainable . what is sustainable is the only ones benefiting are the monsanto executives getting fatter bonus checks. so what is happening it's equivalent to plowing the ocean. you can't do. it's costly happening climate change is happening. the environment is changing.

i'm asking you do that you consider using precautionary principle requiring you to consider the review available science to select alternatives present police potential threat to human health. that's absolutely necessary to stop poisoning the earth. please invoke the cautionary principle. furthermore, we also call here that i pesticide is reviewed within 6 months include a plan for the elimination of-from the san francisco dept. of environment list of pesticides. >> president omotalade thank you. next speaker, please. [calling names] >> testifier: i want to talk to how much the public seems to be interested in this issue. i've been connecting the data on pesticide use by parks and

recreation and i've not got into dpw worthy airport but what i do is every month as such on the documents for the previous month and i usually get it within that object it for january alternate in february. i have not got a favorite report they usually show up. that's all after-the-fact. so i'm very pleased to hear chris talking about better signage for the public about the possibility of using text. the technology is there. there's no reason why we can't have information because somebody must be printing out those signs. publish it on the website. then facebook and twitter. you don't have to develop any new technology to get the word out to the public.

the other aspect is the record-keeping. i thought a mess of lg's pre-much would prove. i get the pesticides usage report i compiled them doing the mistakes i can make my own. if i check it 3-4 times i should be fine. it's not always true. human error can keep in at any time. so what happens is there sometimes things that don't get recorded and their specially involves contractors but once in a while parks and recreation that. so recently i've been trying to reconcile the information from the ipm database which is a lot of work. i discovered there was a 3 space in 2013 i was unaware. it was because of the summer contract. more recently,

in january there was a sprain on mount davidson which i happen to know about because somebody took pictures. that's not in the list either. i'm sure was just an oversight. i'm not trying to suggest any conspiracy theory. but i really do think that this is something for the public needs to be better informed. frankly, i would also like to see a plan with at least phase out the chemical one chemicals and preferably the phase 2 chemicals in our part. i understand the airport. i understand public works. but in our parks where people are exposed to them. >> president omotalade thank you. next speaker, please. [calling names] >> testifier: a longtime

resident of stephen did i want to say when the hash tags for san francisco forest alliance is has to know pesticide san francisco parks. public to say in answer to one of the public's comments we are there. i do believe and this is the date. someone said this is in the day and we are the. as an example-99 9-2002 most good that's a long time ago. that's over 15 years ago. i think san francisco needs to be the leader in this. as far as no wiggle room on tier 1 tier 2 in san francisco. first father to say as far as a slide that was shown i don't believe that plant will move. i don't think it will live being that close to being sprayed. another thing a couple years ago i was looking to the radio and i told a fax that the chemical used on

non-organic strawberries is very send chemical used to induce cancer in the portray test. of course at that moment i stopped using non-organic strawberries and in fact when i have percent of the food my husband and i and food i served my family is 100% organic. the stones in white san francisco can't lead terms of taking a stance saying this can be no pesticides in san francisco parks. i don't want to hear people tell me whatever people here say trust the land managers heard their invasive plants. this is something we know better than you do. no. i know my health. i know my children's health good i know my pets health. i know my family's health. and i do not agree that they know better than i do some of pesticides is good or going to be not harm people or plants or wildlife were people if one child, one wildlife one human is harmed by

this than that means san francisco needs to lead the way. sorry to get emotional. as far as the median strips we discussed this at the last meeting and the other thing discussed at the last meeting were the benefits of these herbicides [inaudible] >> president omotalade tang thank you. next speaker, please. [calling names] >> testifier: chris-just 20 seconds. 2 points are brought up a very valid and important environment is changing. so that's exactly what we need to support biodiversity the preservation of wireline to, date the challenges currently

affecting our world. the 2nd thing brought up how the use of roundup and other chemicals. so as an american i believe more is better i think that is actually just a joke but many people don't know exactly how to apply the roundup properly and so you may found prices light next to the bleed and because roundup can pollute groundwater or soil. that's a red flag in the room but this oil can be contaminated for sophie do our due diligence here and protect our parks is going to be a mute point. it's kind of like the entire city needs to promote better education about use and go to cold hardware and having managers to local people what to do. i want to go right back to the most important plan which is how about diversity

can protect and preserve us i would suggest spot applications of herbicides nationals with degrees and certifications are going to be promoting our help in the long run much more than thinking it's a red flag that always should be removed from one specific area because challenges it could face with the toxic effects. we have a lot of other toxins from around her far more hazardous than this good in conclusion, the entire city needs to be on the same page. >> president omotalade thank you. any further public comment? >> testifier: i just want to reiterate what rupert had said. also recognizing the 4 agencies, their comments earlier. i feel that it's a very solid approach moving forward. i do application myself

and i greatly appreciate and respect the attention to detail for my safety that the city insurers and my safety as well and for those that are around us and i feel that the 4 agencies adequately addressed safety issues using tier 1 tier 2 herbicides and also to continue to encourage our biodiversity in san francisco. >> president omotalade thank you. >> testifier: purpose of the golf division of san francisco. i want to comment on the run abuse at the golf course. we don't actually use a lot of roundup. we would use it may be the turf renovation to avoid using more chemicals when weeds

come to we want to try to illuminate some weeds. israel there. we also eliminated the use of most of our otto when herbicides replace it with cheer to work 2 or 3 herbicides. also reduced our overall broadcast brain with her use of mechanical cultural techniques and we are under contractual obligation to maintain the golf course at the terminal level with the pga in order to do that we do not use chemicals and rip improve employee greatly reduced the overall use would you set the example that and i came policy can work and we can have a world-class call course using

being restricted as we are. >> president omotalade thank you. next speaker, please. >> testifier: i want to correct 2 things which were constantly said something about hotspots. san francisco is a small part of this hotspot. another one the species which exists in san francisco. the many species exist only in san francisco. i want to [inaudible]. i just want to agree not tier 1 or tier 2.

it's fluid. tier 1 becomes tier 2 and tier 2 becomes tier 1. they're both very dangerous. they both be should be forbidden completely. that may give you a small sample. they do kill soil bacterium. i do kill insects. this example is aging orange. i want to say that, as you know it was used in vietnam and used to make sick many many people and veterans. they have children with birth defects.. a lot of them lymphoma [inaudible] was

later used for different reasons. [inaudible] they cause the same diseases in the pilots were flying the planes after the war. they got sick was finally acknowledge those diseases by the dry residue on the plane. that's on the subject of those very small amounts of herbicide which cannot possibly hurt you. so, please do try the hands of those professional managers and don't allow those herbicides in our environment. we won't need

to manage those things maybe they can fix bluestone from the spare don't remove the danger or [inaudible] >> president omotalade >> president you thank you. any further public comment? seeing none, public comment is closed. >>[gavel] >> president omotalade think you for all that. her suspicion on the pastor mike about was 2nd to our director. did you never do to make some comments if you like him and opened up to the commission to discuss. >> testifier: yes, i have to say that i am deeply pressed and touched by the city staff who are here today. i think that it seeks volumes about the

integrity they bring to their jobs are what you heard today -i'm getting a little tired-i am impressed and untouched. in him grateful for the work our department does and that chris geiger does with his colleagues. i'm also very grateful for the people came out to talk about all the different perspectives that are there. you've heard a lot of information. i think we all learned a great deal with her it's about biodiversity, invasive species, natural areas concerns about herbicides opportunities for better transparency concerns about weighing the benefits of the health and safety of people vs. the need for a chemical constituent did this a lot

there. there's a lot to consider. i think the one thing that i hope comes across route and clear is that the ipm program is not random and capricious. it is based on careful thought. it is the result of hundreds of hours of well-intentioned people and that is never done. we are always asking ourselves how can we do better. that won't change. thank's for the opportunity to present that >> president omotalade thank you. have a lot of comments that a first open up the door to my fellow commissioners. anyone have any questions or comments? all started off. i deftly want to thank everyone who came out today for public comment. i swear i think all the city agencies to echo what director rafael said. it deftly

shows your responses to comments that come up that also just the fact that it was 10 pm and there's this many people in city hall. thank you for that as well. i think it shows the level of concern that people in the community have about a serious matter. i think the decision before us is out wiki one tier were looking at-i must admit a massively supportive of the protected areas program. i believe in protecting the biodiversity of the city and county of san francisco. now does that mean we remove all invasiveness? i think we much across the board we all agree that is impossible. what does that mean we try to preserve species that are native to this area, yes, we definitely need to fight as hard as possible to make sure they stay. that they have a healthy existence

because the ecosystem is broad and diverse. but how we do that, is an interesting discussion. we've heard from sciences. referred from experts who say they do need a robust toolbox in order to tackle nature so, any of the comments? commissioner wan >> commissioner wan, it's more process question. we don't approve it tonight, and what we have approved in 2015 will stand until we have? >> testifier: that is my understanding were not approve a change was. unless there are recommendation is to band which is not a recommendation, the

recommendation is to make these changes to the list that is what you're voting on is the changes to the list. >> commissioner wan, i've got a lot of education to give him time to process it but how likely that we come up with a plan to phase out the tier 1 and the tier 1 and tier 2 x 6 months? >> staff: i would say what is very realistic is that we could come back to you with an analysis of what it would take. what does it even look like. i do know 6 months is the right time but i think it's very fair to ask us to say how can we further reduce. what are the options for us what does it say about means what are the trade-offs in terms of labor in terms of biodiversity so i think the conversation is very valid and i would be very willing as director to have my

staff come back to that sort of analysis could i cannot say with any certainty that a phaseout is possible in 6 months. >> president omotalade i have a follow-up question but i've heard the concerns of both the city agency as well as members of the community. at this point, at least in my head i'm not willing to handcuff city agencies in their ability to do the job without a plan. i'm not willing to put tens of thousands of species at risk at the same time i do know children playing in parks to feel unsafe. i'm wondering if we can and i do know 6 months-8 months, come back and have that discussion about a plan particularly in the public parks and then a longer-term conversation about other sites within the city and county of

san francisco knowing grace like the airport other places they be a lot more complicated to get to zero, but at least in the parks and open space the children and dogs and people recreate if we could have a further conversation on that? >> staff: i think that's the conversation we must have. we didn't omotalade is it possible to make a amendment? is at the proper time to make one petri? >> commissioner wald do we need a amendment since the last time we were here we do already decided in 6 months we're going to take a look at where the program was and where i figured we could outlast him? >> president omotalade i think we did say that last time. i would make your event a richards proceed without having institutionalized within the documents. >> staff: if you look at the last result clause, if you look

at the final result have sorry piece of paper for the resolve the commission on environment request the department of the diamond to provide an implementation update to the commission to the policy committee at its regularly scheduled november meeting. if you want to change that language or strengthen that >> president omotalade yes. i like traveling was stricken because it says update on immobilization delicacy that but i'd also like to see as you pointed out director rafael, specifically around the recreation area and part a in part be something was other city sites. the most concern i've heard from the community tonight is run recreation area. i like to abc i don't know what it would take to phase it out and i don't want to say that it can be phased out immediately but like children of date on what that would look like.

>> staff: i think that >> president omotalade do we put some proposed language? beamish the wild first we have to move this item >> president omotalade this tumor comments from 2 other commissioners that i want to-so commissioner stephenson >> commissioner >> stephenson i'm in is very strange position where i'm the 2nd longest serving commissioner . commissioner wald and i is in his come across our desk every year. i've seen a few more times because i'm in the operations committee could i do want to stress that this is a moving documents. as the size gets

better we get better and we learn more and be adjust and i have a great deal of faith in the great minds that sit on our team and our toxic reductions team that's doing this i hear everyone's concern. i have 8 i hear everyone's concern. i have 84.5 unit comes home and talked about how she can taste the flowers this is not an easy fix. it's a hard thing were trying to do. i think it's good take on. so i would hate to think that we can stop our fingers or wave a magic wand and make a blanket statement right now that's going to be valid and viable and useful to us going forward. that said i like to phase out all the bad toxins could that's an honorable goal for us other prominent of the environment. so i have a strong support of approving this would be amendment that we are

discussing putting stronger language kilobit one discussion about how we could phase it out but would actually look like because missing information to be able to make that decision right now. >> president omotalade i would add that i agree with what you said. i also think i heard was members of the committee said. this is san francisco. we do innovation well. so goes san francisco suppose california so goeshe countries oppose soviet responsibility is on our shoulders to assure ourselves. i do understand sometimes push ourselves does mean you stop right now because i think we definitely have made progress in protecting native species that doesn't necessarily mean removing all invasive because i think it was a gentleman pointed out in public comment just because something is non-native doesn't mean it's invasive. i think that what i've heard the experts say is

what they're using herbicides for is the invasiveness that are posing a danger to the natives. at the same time, i've also heard some serious public safety concerns and i do believe in trying-if you have this many people here at this late at night we also have to respect that and continue to push this narrative for how we can at some point get to zero and that should be something that were talking 10 years down the road. that should be something we're very aggressive goals. what those look like i have complete faith and trust in the city agency i think we have some of the greatest minds in the environmental world that work within the agencies here and i'm going to trust them with the oversight of the public to really put all their collective brainpower together to think what that looks like and how that will be. so i deftly want to move forward on the amendment around going back and having a further discussion

as a process i need to understand how that works. if someone could break that down. before i get to that i want to commissioner hoyos has some comments i like to hear is well. >> commissioner hoyos will get the answer to the process question because that would help me a lot. >> president omotalade so we had a amendment to the item before? >> staff: [inaudible] >> president hoyos can it be a separate amendment?

>> staff: [inaudible] >> commissioner hoyos of its new business is not recommended action? okay. >> president omotalade commissioner wald >> commissioner wald are you done? >> commissioner hoyos no. i wonder i go to roger rafael thanks and thank everyone for all the hard work that was done all representatives here and i personally had a lot of questions and i know those a lot of due diligence done to

address some of them. i also want to say that i am in strong favor of this amendment that we are discussing and also just_that for me, to back up one step i could perceive san francisco like a bunch of a students could all the department heads are doing the best i can do the cutting edge. he compared to a bunch of other studies were top top top and i feel like a little bit like people disclosure my position tonight is be good a students for [inaudible] and i still have some concerns. as debbie has said, is director rafael has said this is a living document. what i'll be taking a position on tonight is the

document that's in front of me tonight. i used to be a committee consultant to the senate natural resources committee and you vote and what's in front of you. i stopped him concerns this is not mean i don't deeply applaud -chris i'm looking at you and jen i'm looking at you-the hard work. you added the blue dot. you out of the supervision. won't kick in for 6 months at one applaud that and state. our maybe later i guess i'll say the precautionary principle is important to me. it's important to everybody. i personally saw some concerns when the toxicity and i think the amendment that we will pass will hopefully address some of those. kevin, personally i think i've spent at least re-my 50, 60 hours of learning about this and allowed to out in the field with you would net the best possible

because i take this very seriously. i want to think of public health advocates up in your web all stop there and work with you on the amendment. >> president >> presidentceo markomotalade i like to commend you for forcing the conversation commissioner hoyos. i think there's a collective agreement that we don't want toxins. there's a lot of people are panseared. this testified to that. i'm not a parent but have a dog owner i spent a lot of time in parks and recreation. we want to know that our environment is safe. i look at it also through social equity lines. i spent a lot time in the neighborhoods in the southeast. i look at those residents who've been from

environmental justice perspective have been the subject of so many toxics and some point where does it end? i look at something like bayview hill which was the first were for 2 tonight and that is one of the most biologically diverse areas of the city and county of san francisco. we have to make sure it stays that way. because it truly is a gem within the city. commissioner wald commish wald: i'm going to move that we >> commissioner wald i moved that we approve the with the amendment would not written in. an undergraduate for 3 reasons. i want to say what those reasons are. so bear with me even though it's late. i'm going to move the approval of this resolution, first because

it is part of a strong and robust ipm program. that is, before a secure after year and every year it has got better and every year the amount of toxins that are being used in this city has gone down. a key to my support this year is what we used to call [inaudible] but now we call with restrictions. for me, this document was a big step when it was originally proposed good because it was the first ever [inaudible] time that the city had written wolves. to govern the use of herbicides and pesticides. that was then. a month ago. now, i think it's this list is

significantly improved. it's much stronger than i was originally. it's much more comprehensive and that is due to 2 different sort of clusters of people and i want to thank them also the first is the department staff specifically chris, jen jackson and everyone who has worked on this in a spirit of listening not just to us, but to every member of the public was come before us now for the 3rd, or 4th time to talk about this issue and 2nd, i want to thank each and every one of you for coming. you have been enriched this document. you have enriched our discussions. you've educated all of us and you have impressed all of us with your dedication and your search for

solutions. i am personally convinced that with these new restrictions we will and the leadership of the department-we will see the amount of herbicides particularly care one go down in the coming year and if we don't going to be the first person who asks for an explanation. 2nd, i'm going to support this list is program because as we've heard tonight and in the policy committee, city agencies and city staff need this list to do their jobs. they need to have the tools that is represented by in their toolbox in order to carry out for rams and policies and

requirements and regulations that have been imposed on them by the city of san francisco and in some cases by the federal government. i am a strong supporter of those policies and programs particularly as they result in conserving what is left of our local biodiversity and a local nature and i want our land managers and event stewards to have those. tools. last but not least, i'm going to vote approval for this-i struggle to figure out how to categorize this last reason and i think i would just call it as a matter of-in the city's government. i would be concerned about us taking an action, which would

seriously undermine the ability of other cities agencies to carry out programs that they have been given and entrusted with. not just because they were given them but because what i think the impact would be on this department. i think that if we did that-i'm glad to say it's clear now i don't think what dad do that-but if we did that i think would make an incredibly it's a cult if not impossible for the department to gain the support and partnership of these other agencies to help us carry out the programs to which we were entrusted. in other words, we can't just have a one-way

partnership. if we expect to have strong and robust relationships with other agencies. we have 2 open them do their jobs. at least that's what i think. that's 4 therefore that's why i am moving to a vote of this resolution as amended >> president omotalade there is a motion on the floor. the motion needs to be seconded and i think we have the opportunity to add the amendment. correct? i would just before the motion is seconded, i would just like to say that i come from a academic background on although i have faith the province environment and for the most part i have a lot of faith in other city agencies for the most part i do activist the those watchdogs to show up at

meetings and really be boots on the ground because like i said, anyone who sends me an e-mail i take the time to read it. he recently an article i pay attention to it. i take the role of activists and committee members play in this process very very seriously. i also have heard your concerns particularly the recreation and parks apartment understand is not necessary within our purview to completely but as the department of the room we should keep pushing the environmental envelope. i don't want any decision made here tonight to dissuade anyone from a focus we have. i definitely i think i can speak for all my fellow commissioners summoned

the questions she's been asking and sending e-mails and probing to figure out what is the pathway to get us off chemicals to protect some of the native diversity we have within our system and also [inaudible] i don't see any child is with that i'll 2nd the motion. now we can do it amendment. mr. hoyos >> staff: if homages listening to the discussion and offer language you may want to consider for the amendment. resolution before you but i would suggest listening to what was discussed i would offer on page 3 of the resolution the last result clause online 8-11

at the end of line 11 before the sentence items to include language that would say-maybe i'll redo be further resolved that the commission on the environment request the dept. of the environment to provide an implementation update to the commission's admissions policy committee at its regular scheduled november at its regular scheduled november 2016 committee meeting and then i would offer for your consideration adding what the amendment would read including an analysis on further reducing tier 1-tier 1 herbicides in public parks. that's kind of what i heard commissioners talking about particular area. just for your consideration to discuss and 8 a amendment. >> president omotalade thank you for that.

>> commissioner hoyos we also had an opportunity to get some ideas around. correct me if i'm wrong but in some sort my understanding is, do we shall present an analysis to the full commission. outlines pathway to significantly reduce use of tier 1 pesticides including the possibility of a phaseout within 2 years and a public parks and then b all areas in which these herbicides are used. the idea there is the will to differentiate use of public parks vs. everything to have information because often times people say it's way hard to do it everywhere. most of the concern is about public parks so therefore the differentiation but that's the language that have been discussed by some of us.

>> staff: to use the term herbicides consider pesticides >> commissioner hoyos thank you. >> staff: the differences i hear the differences i hear are duly want to do parks only were parks and everything and then differences where the discussion gets presented units in the policy committee vs. the full commission. those are the 2 differences between- >> commissioner hoyos better now sink is the possibility of a phaseout. >> staff: >> president omotalade for me definitely public parks in all areas because a true good we need to push ourselves to the maximum and to limit ourselves

to parks and open space i think we do the sitting talk to san francisco a great disservice. knowing the fact the other city agencies are partners but also the carrot and stick we need to keep pushing the envelope. >> staff: can you read it again? >> commissioner hoyos that affirmative environment shall present an analysis to the full commission outlines pathway is significant reducing the use of tier 1 pesticides including the possibility of a phaseout within 2 years in a public parks and b all areas which herbicides are used on the office of city county. but we just hands down to them.

>> staff: [inaudible] >> president omotalade a change of language to request. >> staff: to be clear commissioners hoyos is this the continuation of the result clause? >> president omotalade i think it should go where-suggested. >> clerk: the final for the results on page 3 starting at

line 8 would say for the resolved the commission on environment request that affirmative environment to provide implementation through the commission's policy meeting at its regularly scheduled november meeting at its regularly scheduled november 2016 committee meeting and the dept. of the environment and the commission requests the department. and further requests that the department on the environment present an analysis to the full commission that outlines pathway to significantly reduce the use of tier 1 herbicides including the possibility of a phaseout within 2 years and public parks and all areas which in which

these herbicides-sorry commissioners. are used. >> commissioner wald: iva? 2 years. i have a question about the 2 years. i would personally prefer that instead of saying something like 2 years unless there's some magic some rationale for that period do we say something is promptly as possible. each would allow for the possibility that there may be some areas where it's easier

than it is than others to do this and that we might not need to wait for 2 years for those areas. i don't know but i think the two-year limit is too confining both in terms of speed and also in terms of maybe it will take 3 years to do it in some place in 4 years to do it so that i think it's not the right [inaudible] >> staff: the way i understood and read this language it was asking for an analysis. so because is asking for an analysis we could impact